Characterisation of the microbiome along the gastrointestinal tract of growing turkeys

The turkey microbiome is largely understudied, despite its relationship with bird health and growth, and the prevalence of human pathogens such as Campylobacter spp. In this study we investigated the microbiome within the small intestine (SI), caeca (C), large intestine (LI) and cloaca (CL) of turkeys at 6, 10 and 16 weeks of age. Eight turkeys were dissected within each age category and the contents of the SI, C, LI and CL were harvested. 16S rDNA based QPCR was performed on all samples and samples for the 4 locations within 3 birds/age group were sequenced using ion torrent-based sequencing of the 16S rDNA. Sequencing data showed on a genus level, an abundance of Lactobacillus, Streptococcus and Clostridium XI (38.2, 28.1 and 13.0% respectively) irrespective of location and age. The caeca exhibited the greatest microbiome diversity throughout the development of the turkey. PICRUSt data predicted an array of bacterial function, with most differences being apparent in the caeca of the turkeys as they matured. QPCR revealed that the caeca within 10 week old birds, contained the most Campylobacter spp. Understanding the microbial ecology of the turkey gastrointestinal tract is essential in terms of understanding production efficiency and in order to develop novel strategies for targeting Campylobacter spppublishersversionPeer reviewe

Regulatory Fitness: Fintech, Funny Money, and Smart Contracts

© 2019, The Author(s). This article argues that there are many questions that lawyers might ask, and conversations that they might have, about smart contracts; that some questions that are asked are more important than others; and that there are some questions that are not asked but which should be asked. First, it is argued that the question that preoccupies ‘coherentists’ (concerning the application of the law of contract to smart contracts, and the fit between smart contracts and the paradigmatic ‘fiat contracts’ that are recognised by the law of contract) is neither as puzzling nor as important as might be supposed. Secondly, it is argued that, if there are concerns about the acceptability of smart contracts, then the conversation that needs to be had is of a ‘regulatory-instrumentalist’ nature; in particular, if the question is one of public policy restrictions on the use of smart contracts, then the appropriate balance of interests needs to be made by an institution that has both the necessary mandate and the appropriate mind-set. Thirdly, it is argued that there are conversations that we currently do not have but which urgently need to be had. Blockchain is a potentially transformative technology and it is important to have more fundamental conversations about the kind of community that we want to be